Allowed

Riyaz Patel @ Babalu @ Baba v. the State through

Karnataka HC22 Apr 2016CRL.P/200541/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed bail to an accused charged with kidnapping, forcible marriage, and sexual offences against a girl alleged to be over 18. The court relied on the victim's statement denying sexual activity and concluded the prosecution must prove lack of majority and forced intercourse.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail with a personal bond of ₹1,00,000 with two sureties for sum equivalent in discharge of charges.

Riyaz Patel @ Babalu @ Baba Vs the State… — Child Custody and Guardianship | Karnataka HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶3

KALABURAGI BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF APRIL 2016

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION No.200541/2016

¶8

Between:

¶9

Riyaz Patel @ Babalu @ Baba S/o Khasim Patel, Age: 32 years Occ: Private Work, R/o Vatavati Tq. Chittapur, Dist. Kalaburagi

¶10

… Petitioner

¶11

(By Sri Shivasharanareddy, Advocate for Sri Ustad Sadat Hussain, Advocate)

¶12

And:

¶13

The State Through Grameen Police Station, Kalaburagi

¶14

… Respondent

¶15

(By Sri P.S. Patil, HCGP)

¶16

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., praying to release the petitioner on bail in Crime No.483/2015 of Grameen Police Station, Kalaburagi, which is registered for the offences punishable under Sections 366(a), 376(2) (N), 109, r/w Section 34 of IPC and under Sections 4, 6, 11 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

¶17

¶18

This petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

Kalaburagi Rural Police have laid charge sheet against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 366A, 376(2)(n), 109 r/w Section 34 of IPC and also for the offences punishable under Sections 4, 6, 11 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The petitioner has been arraigned as accused No.1 in the case. He was arrested on 29.12.2015 and since then he has been in judicial custody.

¶21

The allegations made against the petitioner is

¶22

that petitioner with the help of accused Nos.2 and 3 kidnapped the victim-girl with an intention to marry the victim-girl who is none other than the daughter of the complainant by name Smt.Rehmatbi of Ashraya colony Zafarbad in Kalaburagi. In that context, it is alleged that said victim-girl was eloped on 10.11.2015 at about

¶23

¶24

10.00 p.m., on the motorcycle of accused No.1. Accused Nos.1 to 3 have kept the said victim girl in their house up to 28.12.2015. It is alleged that petitioner had sexual connection with the said girl in those days and ultimately, witnesses CWs.22 to 24 and 26 have located the presence of the victim girl in the said house and brought them back. On these allegations, it appears, the charge sheet has been filed.

¶25

The certificate dated 21.03.2016 issued by the School Authorities i.e., Government Urdu High School Sheikh Roza Kalaburagi, discloses that date of birth of the victim-girl is 05.06.1998 and that itself shows that she has crossed 17 years and five months as on the date of alleged offences. During the course of investigation, the police have produced the said girl before the jurisdictional Magistrate for recording the statement of the victim under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. On perusal of the said statement, it would disclose that

¶26

¶27

she has categorically stated that the victim herself has forced the petitioner to take her to Hyderabad for the purpose of their marriage and she has also stated that she forced him that she would commit suicide if the petitioner do not take her from her house. It is also stated that they were stayed in Hyderabad for some time and inspite of that, the accused has not done anything to her. In the statement made by the victim-girl before the jurisdictional Magistrate, there is no whisper with regard to any sexual activity between the victim girl and petitioner.

¶28

Looking to the above facts and circumstances,

¶29

as the victim has already crossed 17 and half years and in view of the statement given by her, in my opinion, the prosecution has to prove beyond reasonable doubt during the course of full dressed trial that she has not attained the age of majority and there was a forcible sexual intercourse by the petitioner. Till that point of

¶30

¶31

time, considering the facts and circumstances of this case and as the petitioner was arrested long back i.e., on 29.12.2015 and charge sheet being filed, I am of the opinion that he is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶32

Hence, I pass the following:

¶33

ORDER

¶34

The petition is allowed. Consequently, the

¶35

petitioner shall be released on bail in connection with Crime No.483/2015 of Kalaburagi Rural Police Station, for the alleged offences on the following conditions:

¶36

i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of `1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Special Court.

¶37

ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.

¶38

¶39

iii) The petitioner shall appear before the Court on all future dates of hearing unless prevented by any genuine cause.

¶40

iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Special Court without its prior permission, till the disposal of the case on merits.

¶41

Sd/JUDGE

¶42

NB*

Riyaz Patel @ Babalu @ Baba v. the State through

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Riyaz Patel @ Babalu @ Baba v. the State through

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chandrakant S/O Shankar Rao Patil and Ors. Vs the State of Karnataka

Amrut S/O Shekappa Jamadar Vs the State of Karnataka

Kishor S/O Jayawant Athavale Vs the State of Karnataka

Syed Shafi S/O Syed Saleem Ansari Vs the State through

Hanmanth S/O Gundappa Metre Vs State of Karnataka

Mahiboob S/O Mainoddin Shiraval Vs the State through